Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN 5
LANGUAGE
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
CSPAN
Feb 7, 2013 1:00am EST
. i don't think it does sound, but let's vote on it. to harry reid, the house, it has try to fix ceqa station. we have done nothing in the senate. -- to fix sequestration. we have done nothing in the senate. we are not doing anything in the senate. so, harry, please take the president's proposal or come up with one of your own. put it on the floor and let's start voting. if you do not like what we are doing, come up with your own. we have our fingerprint as republicans on this sequestration idea. it was the president's idea that we come as the republican party agreed to it. we got in this mess together and we will have to get out together. mr. president, helped lead us. -- help lead us. and on like anybody else on this stage, you are the commander in chief -- unlike anyone else on this stage. do you really want your legacy to be that you let the american congress into a deal that would destroy the military at the time it would need it the most? do you want to pivot to asia? how do you do that with 232 ships? when about iran acquiringhave you modernize the f-16 and the f-18? had you go
CSPAN
Feb 15, 2013 9:00am EST
, and the reason why it was 58 votes is because harry reid switched his vote to no soap the senate can bring it back up again. you have a lot of republican senators who were saying last week that they did not want to see it go up in filibuster. at least it would be an up-down of the to be approved. there was no precedent to filibuster a choice like this. and the republicans decided they wanted to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on issues like the terrorist attack in benghazi in september, and so they are committed to passing a goal when they come back. the way you are looking at it, it is a tedious exercise in delaying the inevitable. chuck hagel will be confirmed. he will just have to wait 11 days. you should confirm him because you are going to confirm him anyway. it is just another delay in what the senate is trying to do. host: harry reid set a new vote for tuesday, in 11 days. what do republicans want to see in the meantime? guest: they say they would like answers again from the white house, more details about what the president did and did not do
CSPAN
Feb 6, 2013 1:00pm EST
votes will be problems for harry reid and the senate? these are issues that are going to come over here at some point. don't you -- hold up the process if he's having trouble on these tough issues? >> the legislative process was designed to be inefficient and difficult. so that if congress were able to move a bill through both houses and could agree upon a bill, it would actually become a law. so at the start of every session there are always a number of issues that carry over from the prior session. and frankly there's a lot of scar tissue that carries over with a lot of these bills. it's up to congress to figure out where the common ground is and how to deal with it. let me make clear i don't like the sequester. i think it's taking a meat ax to our government. meat ax to many programs and will weaken our national defense. that's why i fought to not have the sequester in the first place. but the president didn't want to have to deal with the debt limit again before his re-election. it was the president and senate democrats who committed to working with us to get an outcome out of the s
CSPAN
Jan 31, 2013 8:00pm EST
? >> yes. >> yes. thank you, senator. as i understand it on october 2, 2008, majority leader harry reid brought a similar bill to the floor. in fact, it was called the comprehensive iran sanctions accountability act of 2008. and he brought it to the floor in october 2, 2008. there have been media reports that you blocked unanimous consent for the consideration of that bill. are those reports true or not? >> i was one of some republican senators that did not want that vote to go forward. i voted against it in subcommittee. and the reason i did was because the bush administration did not want that bill to go forward. the reason they didn't was because they were involved in negotiations with the russians and the u.n. and security council members to put multilateral sanctions through. >> but just to be clear you did block unanimous contestant. >> i was -- con sent in >> i was part of those who did. >> would it surprise you that an earlier version of those sanctions bill was actually co- sponsored bicek taxpayer cary and clinton and obama at the time? would that surprise you? >> no. not nece
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)